CC: I just finished reading "The Shack"

[TXMary2]

.....and I feel robbed. I want my time back. I literally just put it down 5 minutes ago. I knew the moment he met God that it was tripe, but I wanted to see how it ended. The "new agey - Oprahesque" feel it had was really annoying. I am disappointed that fellow christians highly suggested this book and I have to wonder what, if anything, they think is biblical about it! Ugh.

[danybug]

The book really stirs up strong positive or negative emotions in its readers. I was put off as well. I felt that it was kind of cheesy. I saw no biblical relation or content to it.

 

I thought people might have really enjoyed it because it made God and the Trinity seem personal? I mean I don't know, that is all I could come up with.

[Maverick_Mom]

Dh loved this book and he so wanted me to love it.

 

I didn't.

 

So this was just one of those books that we had to accept would not be the subject of meaningful discussions between us. :D

[JVA]

The theological license it takes with Scripture really bothers me....the author's experience takes precedence over the Word.

 

What also bothers me are the prominent Christians who have come out in support of this book. I think they should know better.

 

This is the best review I've read:

 

http://www.challies.com/book-reviews/a-review-of-the-shack-download-it-here

[Free Indeed]

I felt the same way. They are misrepresenting God.

[Kathleen in VA]

The theological license it takes with Scripture really bothers me....the author's experience takes precedence over the Word.

 

What also bothers me are the prominent Christians who have come out in support of this book. I think they should know better.

 

This is the best review I've read:

 

http://www.challies.com/book-reviews/a-review-of-the-shack-download-it-here

 

:iagree:

[simka2]

If that book hadn't come out when it did. I doubt I would still be a Christian.

[Abigail4476]

If that book hadn't come out when it did. I doubt I would still be a Christian.

 

Okay, there are two ways to take this...:lol: Did the book help you stay a Christian? Or would it have prevented you becoming one had you read it prior to conversion?

[simka2]

Okay, there are two ways to take this...:lol: Did the book help you stay a Christian? Or would it have prevented you becoming one had you read it prior to conversion?

:D:D:D Good point!!!! but it's the former...

 

I really liked the fact that God looked like Mrs. Butterworth!!!!!!! :lol:

[LND1218]

.....and I feel robbed. I want my time back. I literally just put it down 5 minutes ago. I knew the moment he met God that it was tripe, but I wanted to see how it ended. The "new agey - Oprahesque" feel it had was really annoying. I am disappointed that fellow christians highly suggested this book and I have to wonder what, if anything, they think is biblical about it! Ugh.

 

:iagree:

[TXMary2]

The theological license it takes with Scripture really bothers me....the author's experience takes precedence over the Word.

 

What also bothers me are the prominent Christians who have come out in support of this book. I think they should know better.

 

This is the best review I've read:

 

http://www.challies.com/book-reviews/a-review-of-the-shack-download-it-here

 

 

:glare:I wish I had read this first!

[justamouse]

I hated this book! I also hate that many prominent Christians liked it and endorsed it.

 

I know it's fiction but I wouldn't write a book about God like that. I'd be afraid to. My mom's pastor's wife read it. She said she didn't see anything unbiblical about it. :eek:

 

Instead of reading The Shack, read the Bible. You will see what God is really like and it ain't like that god in The Shack.

 

 

I loved seeing God imagined as a black woman. *Loved* it.

[TXMary2]

I loved seeing God imagined as a black woman. *Loved* it.

 

IF God were a woman this "image" wouldn't bother me. It is nothing to do with race and everything to do with theology. In the end God turned out to be an old white guy with a ponytail and I couldn't help but picture a generic hippy professor from _____________ (fill in the blank) University.

[Hockey Mom]

Aside from trying to get anything spiritual out of it, it's just an awful story. I absolutely hated it, and I went into it with an open mind, having read the Amazon reviews.

[TXMary2]

Aside from trying to get anything spiritual out of it, it's just an awful story. I absolutely hated it, and I went into it with an open mind, having read the Amazon reviews.

 

 

I didn't mind the story too much and at least there was some closure there. If there hadn't been I would be even more aggravated!

[i.love.lucy]

The theological license it takes with Scripture really bothers me....the author's experience takes precedence over the Word.

 

What also bothers me are the prominent Christians who have come out in support of this book. I think they should know better.

 

This is the best review I've read:

 

http://www.challies.com/book-reviews/a-review-of-the-shack-download-it-here

:iagree:

 

How do you know?

Because HE created Adam in His image.

[Laurie4b]

He is not a woman, and when he was incarnated, He was incarnated as a man.

 

However, Gen says: "God created man in his own image; in the image of God He created him. Male and female He created them." So the male and female aspects of human beings together are needed to reflect the image of God.

 

As a mother comforts her child,

so will I comfort you;

and you will be comforted over Jerusalem.” Is 66

 

I haven't read the book and don't want to (because of what happened to the kid) but I think there is some biblical basis for thinking about the female side of God.

[CandaceC]

I almost hate to chime in on threads like this. :D But I will. :lol:

 

I am probably almost as conservative as any might be and I loved the book. I read it as a fiction novel...and I love reading fiction. I love reading almost anything...

 

I didn't read it as a theology book...though I do enjoy a theological conversation from time to time! I tend to be a deep thinker, love reading books that make me think...however, this wasn't one of those 'deep reading' books for me. I just enjoyed it.

 

I did not have a good relationship with my dad growing up, though he was a pastor, has a PhD in theology and by all appearances I'm sure we seemed a great Christian family. :confused: I enjoyed the different perspective on God the Father.

 

Anyway, this book really gave me a neat perspective on God...a different way of looking at my relationship with Him...a different way of viewing the Trinity. It made me think out of the box...and I think that is ok sometimes. It did not challenge my faith. It did not make me want to give up my faith.

 

I will say that I see both sides to this argument...I have read tons and tons around the web on it and DO see both sides. But, for me...I personally enjoyed the book.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

:iagree:

 

Because HE created Adam in His image.

 

Does that mean women are second class citizens;)? Honestly, I think it is great to envision God as female or male or both or transcendent:) It saddens me when people think it is anathema to think of God as a woman:(. I think Jesus was revolutionary in his dealings with women and also chose Mary Magdalene as his Apostle to the apostles:). I think women are just as worthy spiritual beings as men IMHO.

[simka2]

There have been so many times I have been thankful that the bible depicts God as a mother eagle and various other created images. Even Jesus uses the imagery of a mother hen. These things are beautiful!!!!

[Ibbygirl]

There have been so many times I have been thankful that the bible depicts God as a mother eagle and various other created images. Even Jesus uses the imagery of a mother hen. These things are beautiful!!!!

 

:iagree::iagree: It was Jesus's gentleness that drew me to Him and got me saved. "Come unto Me all ye who are weary and heavy laden and I will give you rest." That was the verse that did it. :) I haven't read The Shack, though, but I just really agreed with your statement. :)

Edited December 20, 2010 by Ibbygirl

[Cindyg]

I didn't like it either. Did absolutely nothing for me. Parts of it really bothered me. I didn't like how the author imagined God at all. I kept waiting for the good part, but it never came.

[Sevilla]

Here is my theory on the book (using Meyers Briggs personality stuff). Like others have noted, it is fiction and not a theology book - it should be read as art and the truth gleaned from that angle.

 

I think NF personality types tend to love it b/c it's about the relationship/feelings aspect of faith and NF's love allegory (LOVE allegory - it's a major mode of communication for them). Inconsistencies between the allegory and the reality don't bother them b/c they see the deeper themes/big picture and the small details are inconsequential (especially for NFP's). Also, I would be quite surprised to find many NFP's doing a classical model of homeschooling and being on these forums - they would be the minority with SJ's and NT's being the majority (based on my experience).

 

SJ's don't get it b/c it's not accurate in its details - they're more concrete, and while the feelings aspect can be a factor for some the SJ dominating force makes the book outside their comfort zone of truth (b/c the allegory isn't 100% accurate and translatable to biblical theology).

 

NT types just don't get it b/c it doesn't speak their lanuage (being the uber logical type).

 

SP's are probably split on it - and many of them aren't big readers anyway.

[Maverick_Mom]

Here is my theory on the book (using Meyers Briggs personality stuff). Like others have noted, it is fiction and not a theology book - it should be read as art and the truth gleaned from that angle.

 

I think NF personality types tend to love it b/c it's about the relationship/feelings aspect of faith and NF's love allegory (LOVE allegory - it's a major mode of communication for them). Inconsistencies between the allegory and the reality don't bother them b/c they see the deeper themes/big picture and the small details are inconsequential (especially for NFP's). Also, I would be quite surprised to find many NFP's doing a classical model of homeschooling and being on these forums - they would be the minority with SJ's and NT's being the majority (based on my experience).

 

SJ's don't get it b/c it's not accurate in its details - they're more concrete, and while the feelings aspect can be a factor for some the SJ dominating force makes the book outside their comfort zone of truth (b/c the allegory isn't 100% accurate and translatable to biblical theology).

 

NT types just don't get it b/c it doesn't speak their lanuage (being the uber logical type).

 

SP's are probably split on it - and many of them aren't big readers anyway.

 

Interesting theory -- and as an NT, I think it explains part of my aversion to the book.

 

One thing, aside from the spiritual content (or lack thereof, depending on your view), that bothered me was the plotline involving the main character's daughter. I find that subject to be extremely disturbing and can't easily read books or watch movies about it. So to have it discussed, and then "resolved" at the end, the way it was in The Shack -- it just didn't sit well with me.

 

(I'm not elaborating because I don't want to give anything away to anyone who plans to read the book -- but if you've already read it, you know what I mean.)

[Jenny in GA]

Interesting theory -- and as an NT, I think it explains part of my aversion to the book.

 

One thing, aside from the spiritual content (or lack thereof, depending on your view), that bothered me was the plotline involving the main character's daughter. I find that subject to be extremely disturbing and can't easily read books or watch movies about it. So to have it discussed, and then "resolved" at the end, the way it was in The Shack -- it just didn't sit well with me.

 

(I'm not elaborating because I don't want to give anything away to anyone who plans to read the book -- but if you've already read it, you know what I mean.)

 

 

I never finished the book, and eventually gave it away. Could someone tell me how it's "resolved"? You can PM me if that's more appropriate. Thanks!

[HRAAB]

:

 

Because HE created Adam in His image.

 

I was also created in God's image, and I'm certainly not a man. God is pure spirit, neither man nor woman.

 

About the book: I didn't like it, either. It didn't offend me but, the whole picture it painted of God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit was just ... embarrassing. That's the only word I can think of to describe it. I know many who loved the book and found the book profoundly helpful to them. It left me feeling very awkward.

[Heather in Neverland]

Here is my theory on the book (using Meyers Briggs personality stuff). Like others have noted, it is fiction and not a theology book - it should be read as art and the truth gleaned from that angle.

 

I think NF personality types tend to love it b/c it's about the relationship/feelings aspect of faith and NF's love allegory (LOVE allegory - it's a major mode of communication for them). Inconsistencies between the allegory and the reality don't bother them b/c they see the deeper themes/big picture and the small details are inconsequential (especially for NFP's). Also, I would be quite surprised to find many NFP's doing a classical model of homeschooling and being on these forums - they would be the minority with SJ's and NT's being the majority (based on my experience).

 

SJ's don't get it b/c it's not accurate in its details - they're more concrete, and while the feelings aspect can be a factor for some the SJ dominating force makes the book outside their comfort zone of truth (b/c the allegory isn't 100% accurate and translatable to biblical theology).

 

NT types just don't get it b/c it doesn't speak their lanuage (being the uber logical type).

 

SP's are probably split on it - and many of them aren't big readers anyway.

 

This is a very interesting theory and probably not far off. I tend to be a lot more logical left-brained and it was the "oprah-esque" feel that bugged me as well. I can live with the allegory and the weird theology but like others, I read it as fiction.

 

I am just not that touchy-feely of a person (like it bugs me when people call God "Papa"...I am not saying there is anything wrong with it...it just makes my skin crawl :D). So even as fiction it was kinda yucky.:tongue_smilie:

[justamouse]

Here is my theory on the book (using Meyers Briggs personality stuff). Like others have noted, it is fiction and not a theology book - it should be read as art and the truth gleaned from that angle.

 

I think NF personality types tend to love it b/c it's about the relationship/feelings aspect of faith and NF's love allegory (LOVE allegory - it's a major mode of communication for them). Inconsistencies between the allegory and the reality don't bother them b/c they see the deeper themes/big picture and the small details are inconsequential (especially for NFP's). Also, I would be quite surprised to find many NFP's doing a classical model of homeschooling and being on these forums - they would be the minority with SJ's and NT's being the majority (based on my experience).

 

SJ's don't get it b/c it's not accurate in its details - they're more concrete, and while the feelings aspect can be a factor for some the SJ dominating force makes the book outside their comfort zone of truth (b/c the allegory isn't 100% accurate and translatable to biblical theology).

 

NT types just don't get it b/c it doesn't speak their lanuage (being the uber logical type).

 

SP's are probably split on it - and many of them aren't big readers anyway.

 

This infj thinks you nailed it. :D

[JVA]

Here is my theory on the book (using Meyers Briggs personality stuff). Like others have noted, it is fiction and not a theology book - it should be read as art and the truth gleaned from that angle.

 

I think NF personality types tend to love it b/c it's about the relationship/feelings aspect of faith and NF's love allegory (LOVE allegory - it's a major mode of communication for them). Inconsistencies between the allegory and the reality don't bother them b/c they see the deeper themes/big picture and the small details are inconsequential (especially for NFP's). Also, I would be quite surprised to find many NFP's doing a classical model of homeschooling and being on these forums - they would be the minority with SJ's and NT's being the majority (based on my experience).

 

SJ's don't get it b/c it's not accurate in its details - they're more concrete, and while the feelings aspect can be a factor for some the SJ dominating force makes the book outside their comfort zone of truth (b/c the allegory isn't 100% accurate and translatable to biblical theology).

 

NT types just don't get it b/c it doesn't speak their lanuage (being the uber logical type).

 

SP's are probably split on it - and many of them aren't big readers anyway.

 

You present a very interesting take on the book- as an SJ, I see why I look at it the way I do, according to your theory.

The author presents it as 'fiction' but as believers, which the author is, we have a responsibility to present the Lord and His Word and work in us truthfully.

I do have some friends who were greatly touched by the compassion and love in this story that helped heal a great hurt in their lives. While, I don't doubt their experience, I have to move beyond the experiential and to the concrete facts of scripture where I place my trust and future. I don't trust my own perceptions of my experiences to risk life-altering decisions. I'm "standing on the promises of Christ, my King".

[Melinda in VT]

It was a complete waste of time. The only benefit of having read it was that I now have an opinion I can post in threads like this. :D

 

The idea of a Feminine Divine was neither new or shocking, so from a theological perspective the book contributed nothing new or challenging.

 

And from a literary perspective. :eek: Worst written book ever. On a sentence level, paragraph level, plot level--any way you look at it, this book is a mess.

[CandaceC]

I think the personality thing is probably pretty close to true!! (although I sometimes have a hard time picking out all 4 of my letters the same each time! I am definitely I and F, but the other 2 are a little wishy washy to me.)

 

Anyway, I find stuff like that SO interesting, thanks for sharing!!

 

I consider myself a fairly emotional person - though not 'huggy' so much, but I did love the book.

 

However, Heather, being the touchy/feely that I am, I don't really care for the "Papa" thing either! LOL! Not sure why...but it's just never been my thing. :)

[KidsHappen]

Here is my theory on the book (using Meyers Briggs personality stuff). Like others have noted, it is fiction and not a theology book - it should be read as art and the truth gleaned from that angle.

 

I think NF personality types tend to love it b/c it's about the relationship/feelings aspect of faith and NF's love allegory (LOVE allegory - it's a major mode of communication for them). Inconsistencies between the allegory and the reality don't bother them b/c they see the deeper themes/big picture and the small details are inconsequential (especially for NFP's). Also, I would be quite surprised to find many NFP's doing a classical model of homeschooling and being on these forums - they would be the minority with SJ's and NT's being the majority (based on my experience).

 

SJ's don't get it b/c it's not accurate in its details - they're more concrete, and while the feelings aspect can be a factor for some the SJ dominating force makes the book outside their comfort zone of truth (b/c the allegory isn't 100% accurate and translatable to biblical theology).

 

NT types just don't get it b/c it doesn't speak their lanuage (being the uber logical type).

 

SP's are probably split on it - and many of them aren't big readers anyway.

 

 

I am an INFP and I have been here a long time. I only read half of the book and felt like it was a complete waste of my time. I don't get the whole Twilight thing either and it's supposed to be all about feelings. Of course, I have never done what I was supposed to do so my experience probably doesn't count for much. :tongue_smilie:

[Nakia]

I loved The Shack. It changed my walk with God, in a good way.

[simka2]

Here is my theory on the book (using Meyers Briggs personality stuff). Like others have noted, it is fiction and not a theology book - it should be read as art and the truth gleaned from that angle.

 

I think NF personality types tend to love it b/c it's about the relationship/feelings aspect of faith and NF's love allegory (LOVE allegory - it's a major mode of communication for them). Inconsistencies between the allegory and the reality don't bother them b/c they see the deeper themes/big picture and the small details are inconsequential (especially for NFP's). Also, I would be quite surprised to find many NFP's doing a classical model of homeschooling and being on these forums - they would be the minority with SJ's and NT's being the majority (based on my experience).

 

 

SJ's don't get it b/c it's not accurate in its details - they're more concrete, and while the feelings aspect can be a factor for some the SJ dominating force makes the book outside their comfort zone of truth (b/c the allegory isn't 100% accurate and translatable to biblical theology).

 

NT types just don't get it b/c it doesn't speak their lanuage (being the uber logical type).

 

SP's are probably split on it - and many of them aren't big readers anyway.

 

 

Great points! especially the bolded! and I am right on the nf/sj line. If this clarifies...my mother is an artist and grandad (who raised me) was an attorney. I love all things beautiful, but think of good logic as art. Hope that makes sense:D.

 

This also meant that I went and read the entire article linked at the beginning of the thread, and was very saddened by it. I cannot fathom holding a fiction book to a non-fiction, divinely inspired standard. It's not what the book was meant to be.

 

I'm not saying that everyone should be as touched as I was. Just that, it is what it is, and without it many NF types would find God pretty unapproachable.

Edited December 20, 2010 by simka2

[LaissezFaire]

I made it about halfway. I was reading it in the tub and I had just had enough. I threw it at the wall so hard that my husband and all my kids came running to see what was going on. LOL

[Maverick_Mom]

I never finished the book, and eventually gave it away. Could someone tell me how it's "resolved"? You can PM me if that's more appropriate. Thanks!

 

I pm'd you.

[ereks mom]

This infj thinks you nailed it. :D

 

:iagree: I read it for what it is: fiction. I didn't love the book, but for the most part, I enjoyed it. I like the different perspective it presented--God as a black woman was quite interesting and unexpected. I did particularly enjoy Chapter 15, A Festival of Friends, with each person represented by colors.

[happi duck]

I almost hate to chime in on threads like this. :D But I will. :lol:

 

I am probably almost as conservative as any might be and I loved the book. I read it as a fiction novel...and I love reading fiction. I love reading almost anything...

 

I didn't read it as a theology book...

 

great point!

[Sophia]

I couldn't finish that book either.

It felt fake and manipulative.

[mktkcb]

you might like this book, then :o).

 

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=241513